Subtitled An Insider's Guide to the World of Uglies, Bogus to Bubbly is Westerfeld's explanation of how he came up with the ideas underpinning his best selling Uglies quartet. In essence, from the age of sixteen body modification surgery, in conjunction with cognitive modification that the majority of the population are unaware of, is a societal norm - young people in particular push modification to its limits. The first three books follow Tally Youngblood, a young girl who looks beyond the superficial and in the process changes her society irreperably. The final chapter, Extras (reviewed here), takes up events three years alter and on another continent, where Aya Fuse's society has also been affected by Tally's actions even though fame is more important there that the cliques that dominated Tally's city.
Westerfeld begins with the event that started him thinking about the concept that underpins Tally's world, a friend's encounter with an LA dentist. Not unlike a concept journal, Bogus to Bubbly covers aspects like technology (mag-lev boards and trains), cliques and sub-cultures, and slang.
I found this last aspect particularly interesting, in part because it's not something I've gtiven much thought to apart from wondering what causes language to change. It turns out there's a whole linguistic field exploring this aspect of language about what takes off and why. Westerfeld writes about why he chose the words and phrases he did, following a concept Allan Metcalf, in Predicting New Words, calls FUDGE: frequency of use, unobtrusiveness, diversity of users and suituations, generation of other forms and meanings, and endurance of the concept (though Westerfled thinks this last is fairly obvious and substitutes euphony or pretty-soundingness).
Bogus to Bubbly is less absorbing that the novels it's based on, and of no interest at all to those who haven't read the series, but I found it rounded out some aspects of Westerfeld's Uglies universe for me, and made me think more about authorial world building. Lynn believes that knowing more about how an art is created, the bones and structure and evolution of a mystery novel, for example, detracts from her ability to appreciate and immerse herself in it. I to some extent agree - though it may add a layer of technical appreciation, it seems as though a greater awareness of the how must perforce decrease the ah of the experience. In this case, however, I found reading Bogus to Bubbly added to my appreciation of Westerfeld's world. - Alex
Showing posts with label writing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label writing. Show all posts
Sunday, July 12
Thursday, July 2
The To Do List - Mike Gayle
British author Mike Gayle is married, mortgaged, with a daughter and a child on the way. Yet, on the eve of his 36th birthday he still doesn't feel like a proper adult, at least not in comparison with his new and unquestionably grown up neighbours. He and wife Claire are fairly certain Derek and Jessica don't leave milk spilled under the fridge for weeks on end, or still wear undies over a decade old. Long a list writer, Mike writes an oberlist that ends up being 1,277 items long - it ranges from "eat more salad" to "clean windows" (numbers 1 and 1,277 respectively), and covers aspects of family life ("fly kite with child"), friendship ("have John and Sue over for dinner"; "post Jackie and Mark's unposted Christmas card"), love ("write love letters to wife like I used to"), self improvement ("read something by Freud"; "get to know cheese") and fiddly bits of business ("finish Guardian quick crossword begun in April").
To ensure he stuck to it, Gayle emailed all his friends with his intention to do all of his list within a year, giving them permission to tease him unmercifully if he failed. He inadvertently included his agent in the mass emailing, who approached a publisher, which is not only how Gayle stuck to it but also how The To-Do List became a book.
Gayle's voice is straight-forward, funny and honest. From the first page I found points of reference, from the unread (but once longed-for) DVD box sets to the evil siren call of procrastination and the arduousness of tackling War and Peace.
The book combines his attempts to meet his aims with reflections on his life, and the year he spent between birthdays was more than a pursuit of adulthood - it was an opportunity to reconnect with friends and family, reassess relationships, and take stock of his life. As an inveterate writer of many undone To Do lists I was inspired to create my own, far more modest 250-item version that I similarly hope to achieve by this time next year. One item is writing reviews of books in a more timely manner - Alex
To ensure he stuck to it, Gayle emailed all his friends with his intention to do all of his list within a year, giving them permission to tease him unmercifully if he failed. He inadvertently included his agent in the mass emailing, who approached a publisher, which is not only how Gayle stuck to it but also how The To-Do List became a book.
Gayle's voice is straight-forward, funny and honest. From the first page I found points of reference, from the unread (but once longed-for) DVD box sets to the evil siren call of procrastination and the arduousness of tackling War and Peace.
The book combines his attempts to meet his aims with reflections on his life, and the year he spent between birthdays was more than a pursuit of adulthood - it was an opportunity to reconnect with friends and family, reassess relationships, and take stock of his life. As an inveterate writer of many undone To Do lists I was inspired to create my own, far more modest 250-item version that I similarly hope to achieve by this time next year. One item is writing reviews of books in a more timely manner - Alex
Sunday, February 22
The Science of Science-Fiction Writing - James Gunn
In this generally comprehensive (I'll come to the not comprehensive part shortly), Gunn guides the would-be SF writer first (in "How to Write Fiction") through the history and craft of fiction writing (subdivided into smaller chapters dealing with character development, scene writing, suspense, dialogue, critiquing among others) before looking at science fiction. Much of this would be relevant to any would-be writer, or indeed anyone interested in learning about the structure and mechanics of writing. I always find this a little challenging, being confronted by the fact that the books I enjoy don't effortlessly and seamlessly flow out on to the page. I do, I hasten to add, know this, but I like to avoid the knowledge of this unromantic fact as much as possible.
Gunn's second section, "How to Write Science Fiction," begins with a reflection on the origins of the genre (was the first SF novel Frankenstein or The Time Machine, the Golden Age of Science Fiction etc), an eight page discussion about how to define the term, and extensive chapter on how ideas come to the prepared and inquisitive mind, and an examination of the different kinds of characters prevalent.
The last main, and to my mind least useful, section is about SF writers, with chapters for each of HG Wells, Robert A Heinlein, Issac Asimov, and the partnership of Henry Kuttner and Catherine Moore, who wrote under a variety of nomes de plume in the forties and fifties. Each author section explores the era, the author's history, their writing beginnings and their greatest works, and their impact on the genre.
I've read all of the featured authors bar Kuttner/Moore, which might be why I was disenchanted with Gunn's rhapsodical (and by far most exhaustive) raves for their work. This last chapter reads like a pared down version of a lovingly-researched thesis, and I don't think it helps budding authors at all - the Golden Age is well over.
There is very little acknowledgement, apart from the obligatory William Gibson reference, to more contemporary writing, even though the book was only published eight years ago, and often times Gunn refers to authors with an expectation that the reader is already familiar with their work. I kept thinking about some of my favourite genre authors who aren't even obliquely refereced, and I'm startled by the complete absence of women from Gunn's discussion.
Which brings me to my biggest issue with The Science of Science Fiction Writing - the intent of the book and its target audience. My library have it shelved as an 808.3, writers' resources, in with a bunch of how to guides and literary riffs. But it doesn't necessarily tell the beginner reader how to write SF, as opposed to, say, Will Write for Shoes, Cathy Yardley's how to write chick lit text I recently reviewed.
Nor is it a history of the genre, and it most certainly is not about the science of science fiction, a topic far better covered in books like The Physics of Star Trek, Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics (which I haven't read but think sounds fabulous), or The Science of Star Wars. I think I expected the approach, taking in these books and similar ones (like The Philosophy of the Simpsons or Seinology: The Sociology of Seinfeld) of marrying an aspect of pop culture with a (soft or hard) science analysis, but Gunn hasn't looked at the science aspect at all - the science fiction writing advice doesn't even mention making sure your science is feasible, concentrating instead on other, unquestionably important, aspects of writing. That's fine, but in that case call your book How to Write Science Fiction - your audience will find you far more easily, and those expecting something different won't be taken aback.
There's a small final section which suggests a program (based, I strongly suspect, on Gunn's own teaching course), using chapters of his book as reading guides.
It was interesting, and I'm glad I read this erudite contribution from an author I haven't previously read (but whose work sounds interesting), but it was nothing like I expected. I can't tell if my issue with the text was that it actually is flawed, or if it was a result of the dissonance between expectation and reality. As I renewed the book twice, picking it up and putting it down multiple times, I suspect the the latter but can't be sure. - Alex
Gunn's second section, "How to Write Science Fiction," begins with a reflection on the origins of the genre (was the first SF novel Frankenstein or The Time Machine, the Golden Age of Science Fiction etc), an eight page discussion about how to define the term, and extensive chapter on how ideas come to the prepared and inquisitive mind, and an examination of the different kinds of characters prevalent.
The last main, and to my mind least useful, section is about SF writers, with chapters for each of HG Wells, Robert A Heinlein, Issac Asimov, and the partnership of Henry Kuttner and Catherine Moore, who wrote under a variety of nomes de plume in the forties and fifties. Each author section explores the era, the author's history, their writing beginnings and their greatest works, and their impact on the genre.
I've read all of the featured authors bar Kuttner/Moore, which might be why I was disenchanted with Gunn's rhapsodical (and by far most exhaustive) raves for their work. This last chapter reads like a pared down version of a lovingly-researched thesis, and I don't think it helps budding authors at all - the Golden Age is well over.
There is very little acknowledgement, apart from the obligatory William Gibson reference, to more contemporary writing, even though the book was only published eight years ago, and often times Gunn refers to authors with an expectation that the reader is already familiar with their work. I kept thinking about some of my favourite genre authors who aren't even obliquely refereced, and I'm startled by the complete absence of women from Gunn's discussion.
Which brings me to my biggest issue with The Science of Science Fiction Writing - the intent of the book and its target audience. My library have it shelved as an 808.3, writers' resources, in with a bunch of how to guides and literary riffs. But it doesn't necessarily tell the beginner reader how to write SF, as opposed to, say, Will Write for Shoes, Cathy Yardley's how to write chick lit text I recently reviewed.
Nor is it a history of the genre, and it most certainly is not about the science of science fiction, a topic far better covered in books like The Physics of Star Trek, Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics (which I haven't read but think sounds fabulous), or The Science of Star Wars. I think I expected the approach, taking in these books and similar ones (like The Philosophy of the Simpsons or Seinology: The Sociology of Seinfeld) of marrying an aspect of pop culture with a (soft or hard) science analysis, but Gunn hasn't looked at the science aspect at all - the science fiction writing advice doesn't even mention making sure your science is feasible, concentrating instead on other, unquestionably important, aspects of writing. That's fine, but in that case call your book How to Write Science Fiction - your audience will find you far more easily, and those expecting something different won't be taken aback.
There's a small final section which suggests a program (based, I strongly suspect, on Gunn's own teaching course), using chapters of his book as reading guides.
It was interesting, and I'm glad I read this erudite contribution from an author I haven't previously read (but whose work sounds interesting), but it was nothing like I expected. I can't tell if my issue with the text was that it actually is flawed, or if it was a result of the dissonance between expectation and reality. As I renewed the book twice, picking it up and putting it down multiple times, I suspect the the latter but can't be sure. - Alex
Sunday, January 25
Will Write for Shoes - Cathy Yardley
Subtitled How to write a chicklit novel, this comprehensive text begins with a history and definition of the genre:
This engaging how-to book takes the aspiring writer through all the stages of the writing and publication process. The bulk of the book is divided into two sections - writing and publishing.
The first discusses the basics of traditional novels in the genre; up-and-coming trends (and the pitfalls of writing to capture the wave rather than the kind of writing you want to write); the key points of plotting and a couple of ways to do it (meticulously detailed in advance vs free form and evolving); the elemental but overlooked concepts of structure, setting and voice; and the unpleasant but vital necessity that is editing.
Yardley then moves on to getting published, from query letters and synopsis creation to forming a crit group and networking online. The book is rounded out by answers to questions Yardley (a multipublished author I confess I haven't heard of until now, let alone read) receives, samples of query letters and synopses, and an extensive but American-centric listing of agents and publishers, with brief descriptions of their imprints and histories.
As I'm not interested in publishing my own writing (NaNoWriMo's field enough for me, and I should probably work on academic publication before thinking about a hobby), I found the frequent references to, and tantalisingly brief synopses of, books I hadn't read (What a girl wants by Liz Maverick, The Golden Notebook by Doris Lessing, American Idle by Alesia Holliday, Fishbowl and Me vs Me by Sarah Mlynowski, The Weight-Loss Diaries by Courtney Rubin, Julie and Romeo and Step-Ball-Change by Jeanne Ray, Play Dates by Leslie Carroll, Carrie Pilby by Caren Lissner, Are you in the mood? by Stephanie Lehmann, and The song reader by Lisa Tucker, among others).
However, as both an amateur writer and reader, and friend of a couple of aspiring writers in the genre, I found what Yardley wrote cohered with what I already knew, as well as expanding on any number of points I didn't know about, particularly in the section on making sure you and your crit group are a good fit. I also thought her advice to bother revise, revise, revise, and to read widely in a varity of genres was well worth reiterating.
Yardley's refreshingly blunt - "if you think of your novel as your baby you're in for a world of hurt", people aren't necessarily going to love it, and you can easily write a synopsis shorter than ten pages - while still being supportive. I found Will write for shoes by accident in the writing section at the library, and though I say this without having read any other how to books for the genre think anyone interested in writing for the market ought to read this book.
If her fiction's anything like her non-fiction, I think I'll enjoy that too - and I'll try to overlook the fact that she's swollen my to-read list past it's previous bulging parameters.- Alex
a subgenre of the larger classification of women's fiction, generally aI'm inclined to say that this pretty much defines women's fiction in general, but it's not too off the mark. And of course the problem with defining chick lit is that it's constantly evolving and comprises an expanding number of fuzzy sub-genres, so there are exceptions to every aspect of any detailed definition.
coming-of-age or "coming-of-consciousness" story where a woman's life is transformed by the events of the story... a sense of humour... a funny tone... the characters don't take themselves too seriously, no matter how dire the circumstances... deal[ing] with topics that affect a woman's life: friendship dynamics. Glass ceilings. Over-nurturing. Kids and biological clocks. And, of course, love.
This engaging how-to book takes the aspiring writer through all the stages of the writing and publication process. The bulk of the book is divided into two sections - writing and publishing.
The first discusses the basics of traditional novels in the genre; up-and-coming trends (and the pitfalls of writing to capture the wave rather than the kind of writing you want to write); the key points of plotting and a couple of ways to do it (meticulously detailed in advance vs free form and evolving); the elemental but overlooked concepts of structure, setting and voice; and the unpleasant but vital necessity that is editing.
Yardley then moves on to getting published, from query letters and synopsis creation to forming a crit group and networking online. The book is rounded out by answers to questions Yardley (a multipublished author I confess I haven't heard of until now, let alone read) receives, samples of query letters and synopses, and an extensive but American-centric listing of agents and publishers, with brief descriptions of their imprints and histories.
As I'm not interested in publishing my own writing (NaNoWriMo's field enough for me, and I should probably work on academic publication before thinking about a hobby), I found the frequent references to, and tantalisingly brief synopses of, books I hadn't read (What a girl wants by Liz Maverick, The Golden Notebook by Doris Lessing, American Idle by Alesia Holliday, Fishbowl and Me vs Me by Sarah Mlynowski, The Weight-Loss Diaries by Courtney Rubin, Julie and Romeo and Step-Ball-Change by Jeanne Ray, Play Dates by Leslie Carroll, Carrie Pilby by Caren Lissner, Are you in the mood? by Stephanie Lehmann, and The song reader by Lisa Tucker, among others).
However, as both an amateur writer and reader, and friend of a couple of aspiring writers in the genre, I found what Yardley wrote cohered with what I already knew, as well as expanding on any number of points I didn't know about, particularly in the section on making sure you and your crit group are a good fit. I also thought her advice to bother revise, revise, revise, and to read widely in a varity of genres was well worth reiterating.
Yardley's refreshingly blunt - "if you think of your novel as your baby you're in for a world of hurt", people aren't necessarily going to love it, and you can easily write a synopsis shorter than ten pages - while still being supportive. I found Will write for shoes by accident in the writing section at the library, and though I say this without having read any other how to books for the genre think anyone interested in writing for the market ought to read this book.
If her fiction's anything like her non-fiction, I think I'll enjoy that too - and I'll try to overlook the fact that she's swollen my to-read list past it's previous bulging parameters.- Alex
Saturday, August 30
Blind Submission - Debra Ginsberg
Voracious reader Angel Robinson is directed to the perfect job by her would-be author boyfriend, Malcolm - reader/assistant to famed literary agent Lucy Fiamma. Angel can't imagine anything better than being paid to read, even if most of what she expects to cover will be dross, and the possibility of discovering another world-class writer is exhilarating. But the reality of working for Lucy is the opposite of what she expects - her office mates are unpleasant, the hours are torturous, her employer is an unreasonable shrew, and she thinks she's being stalked by a persistent, prolific, and wholly talentless aspiring author. Perhaps worst of all, she has no free time, a situation her increasingly distant boyfriend can't seem to understand. And then Angel starts getting chapters of a novel set in a literary agency. The characters are polar opposites of those as the Lucy Fiamma agency, but so precisely opposite it's spooky. And the anonymous writer seems to know details about Angel's life no outsider possibly could. The writer's someone Angel knows - but is it Malcolm, weird office mate Anna, stalkerish submitter Peter, attractive new author Damiano, or someone Angel never suspects at all?
I'm not the first to compare Blind Submission to the highly successful Devil Wears Prada, another boss-from-hell, ingenue-heroine novel. However, unlike that relatively well-written novel, I found Blind Submission irritating and ponderous. The twist at the end was broadcast chapters ahead, the anonymously-authored novel is poorly written and superficial, and Lucy is highly unlikeable and is bereft of a single redeeming feature. These last two make Angel's keenness to acquire Blind Submission, and her loyalty to Lucy, impossible to understand.
I also found some inconsistencies jarring - like the fatherless Angel comparing seeing her icy, controlled employer breaking down under the influence of tranquilisers and alcohol to "the same feeling you get when you witness your parents fighting... it was just wrong - and uncomfortable in the extreme." Not an example you'd think someone who never had more than one parent would give. (I, for example, had parents who fought a lot, so while I might use parental arguing as a simile for other kinds of distressing, upsetting or anxiety-inducing event, it would never occur to me to give that as an example of something that felt 'just wrong' or 'uncomfortable').
It wasn't all bad - the sample submissions from the slush pile are great, and highly representative (from what I understand, having no first-hand knowledge or experience of the industry) of actual submissions by misguided writers. However the only reason I finished it was because I was on a plane and was concerned that my reading material would finish before the twelve-hour flight. Note to Australian Women's Weekly - this is not a great read and I want my money back. - Alex
I'm not the first to compare Blind Submission to the highly successful Devil Wears Prada, another boss-from-hell, ingenue-heroine novel. However, unlike that relatively well-written novel, I found Blind Submission irritating and ponderous. The twist at the end was broadcast chapters ahead, the anonymously-authored novel is poorly written and superficial, and Lucy is highly unlikeable and is bereft of a single redeeming feature. These last two make Angel's keenness to acquire Blind Submission, and her loyalty to Lucy, impossible to understand.
I also found some inconsistencies jarring - like the fatherless Angel comparing seeing her icy, controlled employer breaking down under the influence of tranquilisers and alcohol to "the same feeling you get when you witness your parents fighting... it was just wrong - and uncomfortable in the extreme." Not an example you'd think someone who never had more than one parent would give. (I, for example, had parents who fought a lot, so while I might use parental arguing as a simile for other kinds of distressing, upsetting or anxiety-inducing event, it would never occur to me to give that as an example of something that felt 'just wrong' or 'uncomfortable').
It wasn't all bad - the sample submissions from the slush pile are great, and highly representative (from what I understand, having no first-hand knowledge or experience of the industry) of actual submissions by misguided writers. However the only reason I finished it was because I was on a plane and was concerned that my reading material would finish before the twelve-hour flight. Note to Australian Women's Weekly - this is not a great read and I want my money back. - Alex
Tuesday, September 18
Some Writers Deserve to Starve! - Elaura Niles
Subtitled 31 Brutal Truths About the Publishing Industry, this US-authored book aims to give would-be authors some well needed advice about the realities of modern day publishing. Niles has written 31 chapters, each summarised with a Truth (like #23 - Not All Critique Groups Are Critique Groups, or #14 - To Lie is Wrong, to Embellish Divine) that is then expanded upon, and often illustrated by her own experience in the world of writing.
The back of the book warns that this is "only for the bravest of writers", but I'm more inclined to say it's only for the most fledgling and unrealistic of writers. I don't doubt they're out there, but surely at least some would-be published writers already know that "Putting Words on a Page Does Not Obligate Anyone to Read Them" (Truth #2), "Overnight Success Doesn't Happen Overnight" (Truth #25), and "Writing Conferences Cost Bucks"(Truth #26) .
Maybe it's just that I, a writer of no fewer than two and a half NaNo masterpieces myself, am more pragmatic. I grant you, I've not exerted any great time or effort on publication, and so I'm missing the drive to write, write, live to write. Lynn is more involved in writing than I (more NaNo completions, a crit group member, winner of two short story competitions, organiser of another competition, member of a guild), but equally aware of Niles' Truths - and without having had the privilege of shelling out for the book.
For those writing with their eyes tightly closed, or spectacularly naive, this is probably a necessary shock of cold water. But for anyone (like me) looking for a book telling hopeful writers that it's time to pack it in and give up already, go to 101 Reasons to Stop Writing ("confronting the pandemic delusion of talent") instead: http://101reasonstostopwriting.com/ - Alex
The back of the book warns that this is "only for the bravest of writers", but I'm more inclined to say it's only for the most fledgling and unrealistic of writers. I don't doubt they're out there, but surely at least some would-be published writers already know that "Putting Words on a Page Does Not Obligate Anyone to Read Them" (Truth #2), "Overnight Success Doesn't Happen Overnight" (Truth #25), and "Writing Conferences Cost Bucks"(Truth #26) .
Maybe it's just that I, a writer of no fewer than two and a half NaNo masterpieces myself, am more pragmatic. I grant you, I've not exerted any great time or effort on publication, and so I'm missing the drive to write, write, live to write. Lynn is more involved in writing than I (more NaNo completions, a crit group member, winner of two short story competitions, organiser of another competition, member of a guild), but equally aware of Niles' Truths - and without having had the privilege of shelling out for the book.
For those writing with their eyes tightly closed, or spectacularly naive, this is probably a necessary shock of cold water. But for anyone (like me) looking for a book telling hopeful writers that it's time to pack it in and give up already, go to 101 Reasons to Stop Writing ("confronting the pandemic delusion of talent") instead: http://101reasonstostopwriting.com/ - Alex
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)